I haven’t written one of these in a while: that sort of post wherein I remind readers that sometimes when I haven’t written about a topic in the news, it’s because I don’t really have anything worthwhile to say about it, not because I’m uninterested.
The negotiations with Iran over its stated intention to develop nuclear energy capabilities and its presumed covert intention to build nuclear weapons? It worries me a great deal, especially with every new revelation that the U.S. negotiating team is not really negotiating with Iran but running interference for them to get other countries to accept the deal. Every indicator is that Obama is a-ok with Iran getting a bomb as long as he can defer this until he leaves office. Heck, based on some reports of his inability to contain his personal dislike for Netanyahu, it wouldn’t even be a surprise if he handed over nuclear weapons to Iran to spite him. But I don’t really have anything to say other than, “hey, this is really bad.” Except maybe “this is really, really bad.”
The Hillary Clinton e-mail issue: she destroyed her server. Destroyed it. Even Nixon didn’t destroy his tapes. It’s deeply disturbing. I’ve read that she could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice because the timeframe suggests that this destruction happened after the subpoena was already issued, though I don’t know if a subpoena from Congress has the same legal force as in a criminal case — and she was not under criminal investigation, and, so far as I know, no one believes that her e-mails would show criminal misconduct so much as callous indifference to the Americans in Benghazi and pursuit of her own political power at the expense of the national security of the country. What’s more disturbing is, ultimately, that Democrats still defend her, saying, “these were her personal e-mails” and disregarding the fact that she used this very server for her e-mail correspondence as Secretary of State, and only turned over to the government printouts of those e-mails which she chose to provide — and when I say “Democrats” I mean as much comments on blogs and articles as the pundits themselves.
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Indiana. Read The Federalist, and Ann Althouse. Yes, Democrats/”progressives” want to have it both ways: protecting the religious freedom of groups they favor but not those they oppose. And it’s shocking to see the short memories of people like Obama and the administration. And the boycotts? It’s ludicrous. But you all know that already.
And — last on the list is the usual “report from home” after another visit back to my parents’ during the kids’ spring break. Yes, my husband did the taxes, and managed some general oversight of their finances, and I cleaned out the fridge and the kitchen, in general, and helped with some of the other piled-up housework. But Dad is doing worse than before, and Mom is able to make it from day to day but not more than that. So no good answers here, either.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In